Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Although the iPhone 5s and 5c are both great phones, the Samsung Galaxy S4 and the latest Motorola Droid models -- the Droid Maxx, Droid Ultra, and Droid mini -- are currently better choices, says Consumer Reports. The Droids in particular are said to have superior battery life, and larger displays. CR also points to some software advantages, such as Google Now and Motorola's Active Notifications.

The iPhone 5s is lauded for its 64-bit processor, high-quality camera, and Touch ID fingerprint sensor, which the publication says makes unlocking a phone faster than using a PIN or password. The iPhone 5c, meanwhile, is described as a "compelling offering for budget-minded buyers." Both phones are said to benefit from iOS 7, which includes things like Control Center and improvements to Siri.

The two major complaints with the 5s and 5c could be solved next year. Apple is rumored to be testing iPhone screens up to 6 inches in size, which would put Apple devices in better competition with Android phones, many of which are now over 4.5 inches in size compared to the iPhone's 4. The Galaxy S4 and Droid Maxx each use 5-inch screens.

So bigger screens = better phones? Hmm. I'm not sure I buy that as an indicator of quality ... I'm not against bigger-screen phones per se, but using that as THE yardstick of whether one phone is better than another seems like a "purchased opinion" to me ...

Agree with Chas. Bigger is not always better. I'm probably an anomaly anyway, and use my phone mainly as a phone. As I also keep it in my front pocket, the iPhone size is perfect for me. I don't need a removable battery, and am willing to sacrifice that aspect for a smaller phone. I won't even get into the app infrastructure, the lack of malware, and the well thought out user interface of the iPhone. Oops, I guess I just did . . .

I disagree that CR is the new Foxnews, they are more like ALL of the media outlets. They all have an agenda and do a dis-service to the general public. The clearly do not like Apple and prove it with every 'Apple's not so good' review they write. No matter HOW popular the device is. I'm sorry, my personal opinion, people look like dorks with these 'large screen phones' plastered to their heads.

There are multiple issues with Consumer Reports' rankings for any product.

First, there is no way for the reader to discern how each factor weighs into the product's total score and whatever method is used is necessarily an arbitrary choice that likely weights the factors differently than most people would (and each person would likely complain differently).

Second, sometimes their results for a factor are ludicrous due to their own ignorance, such as when they claimed that wood and metal decks are equally viable/comfortable because they are measured to be the same temperature on a sunny day, which completely ignores the significant difference in heat transfer capacity between the materials, which is what actually determines how hot the deck feels to a bare foot.

The one thing thing they always excel at is measuring the details the naive and uninformed consumer thinks they care about. Often that matches "well enough". It's just that with tech products, those details are more likely to be those hyped by media instead of important ones like "ease of use", "long term support", "useful security updates", etc.

Consumer Reports is OK for information for those purchasing cars. And maybe appliances like toasters. But when it comes to tech they are a joke.

I started snickering at them back in the days of the G4 towers - they claimed there were no bays to install additional internal hard drives in. I was reading that when using a G4 tower that had at least 4 hard drives installed.

I'm not going to bother reading the review. Likely it leaves out things such as the malware rampant on Android - yet conspicuously lacking on iPhone, most web activity from mobile devices originates on iOS devices, and updates for Android OS are lacking....

Then I guess that means that the National Enquirer is a better magazine than Consumer Reports because it's larger. And anything smaller than CR is worse. I like that there's a choice of sizes in the market, but personally, I like the size of the iPhone. I don't like holding something the size of a small cake pan to my face to talk.

The problem with institutions like Consumer Reports is that, in the interest of neutrality, they apply the same methodology to all tested products, be they desk lamps, stereo equipment, washer-dryers, fax machines, or phones.

This necessarily reduces their reviews to spec wars, with little or no regard to the fact that better specs do not necessarily a better product make.

I'm told that at some point in the late 80s, our local equivalent, Stiftung Warentest, proclaimed that they would no longer review CD players, on the grounds that they were all 16-bit/44.1 kHz, and thus all sounded identical due to digital spec. Everybody had a good laugh at that.

I DO NOT want a bigger screen! Those Android 'phablets' are ridiculously large for their primary purpose - being a phone. I guess there's nothing wrong with Apple giving people the choice for those who want it, but please, keep the current very well judged compromise between screen real estate and pocketability and holdability. To mark Apple down for this intelligent compromise is ridiculous.